l i n u x - u s e r s - g r o u p - o f - d a v i s
L U G O D
 
Next Meeting:
August 5: Social gathering
Next Installfest:
TBD
Latest News:
Jul. 4: July, August and September: Security, Photography and Programming for Kids
Page last updated:
2002 Feb 01 15:55

The following is an archive of a post made to our 'vox mailing list' by one of its subscribers.

Report this post as spam:

(Enter your email address)
Re: [vox] PostgreSQL vs. Oracle
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [vox] PostgreSQL vs. Oracle



Don Werve wrote:
> 
> On Fri, Feb 01, 2002 at 11:23:15AM -0800, Rod Roark wrote:
[snip]
> > BTW I suspect that Oracle will seriously outperform PG for databases
> > larger than 2-3 GB.  But maybe that's changed too.  It would be nice to
> > see some recent benchmarks.
> 
> I'd say that would be an accurate assesment, only because PG doesn't have
> any way of dealing with raw disks (tell me if I'm wrong on this one, as
> I'd love to be); and you can't beat the performance kick that comes from
> not having to deal with the filesystem layer by using raw I/O.

I asked a competent db guy about this and he said that although Oracle
has this capability, most are not configured in this way. Is this an
unnecessary burden for a smaller db?

> Then again, anyone considering a large database on Intel hardware is insane;
> there's a reason why big databases run on big iron.  Let's see an Intel
> machine hold 128 processors, talk to ten seperate fibre channel arrays, and
> dynamically re-assign CPUs, memory, and I/O from a serial port.  Oh, and
> we can't forget the ability to hot-swap almost every component on the
> machine with zero downtime.  That's why people like Sun, IBM, and HP are
> still in business.

... and yet Oracle intends on replacing big iron with clustered Lintel.
I wonder if big iron can really compete with multiple Linux boxes and a
NetAp in the background. It does create another layer to optimize, but
how many coders can you hire for the difference in cost?

> 
> But otherwise, I like Postgres, and I don't care too much for Oracle.  From
> a coder's point of view, Oracle does have some neat features that aren't
> present in Postgres; but, at the same time, it's nothing that can't be
> easily implemented in the DB-interface layer of an application, and for the
> savings of not using Oracle...

I like postgres and have never used Oracle, so I really appreciate your
comments.
--
Eric Engelhard
_______________________________________________
vox mailing list
vox@lists.lugod.org
http://lists.lugod.org/mailman/listinfo/vox



LinkedIn
LUGOD Group on LinkedIn
Sign up for LUGOD event announcements
Your email address:
facebook
LUGOD Group on Facebook
'Like' LUGOD on Facebook:

Hosting provided by:
Sunset Systems
Sunset Systems offers preconfigured Linux systems, remote system administration and custom software development.

LUGOD: Linux Users' Group of Davis
PO Box 2082, Davis, CA 95617
Contact Us

LUGOD is a 501(c)7 non-profit organization
based in Davis, California
and serving the Sacramento area.
"Linux" is a trademark of Linus Torvalds.

Sponsored in part by:
O'Reilly and Associates
For numerous book donations.